Madras High Court Closes Contempt Petition After Compliance with Order in Service Matter. Order dated 10.04.2019 in W.P.No.24368 of 2006 Complied With.

High Court: Madras High Court
  • 116
Judgement Image
Font size:
Print

Case Note & Summary

The petitioner, R. Vellaichamy, filed a contempt petition (CONT P No. 3839 of 2024) before the Madras High Court alleging willful disobedience of an order dated 10.04.2019 passed in W.P.No.24368 of 2006. The respondents were government officials: the Secretary of the Commercial Taxes and Registration Department, the Inspector General of Registration, and the Deputy Inspector General of Registration. The petitioner sought to punish them for neglecting to comply with the court's earlier order. During the hearing, the learned Government Counsel, Mr. L. Gokulraj, handed over documents demonstrating that the order had been complied with. In view of this compliance, the court, presided over by Justice Senthilkumar Ramamoorthy, closed the contempt petition. The order was dated 05-06-2026 and uploaded on 09-06-2026. The judgment is brief, with no detailed analysis of facts or legal issues beyond noting compliance.

Headnote

A) Contempt of Court - Willful Disobedience - Compliance - The contempt petition alleged willful disobedience of a court order dated 10.04.2019 in W.P.No.24368 of 2006. The Government Counsel produced documents evidencing compliance. Held that since the order was complied with, the contempt petition is closed. (Paras 1-2)

Subscribe to unlock Headnote Subscribe Now

Issue of Consideration

Whether the respondents had willfully disobeyed the order dated 10.04.2019 in W.P.No.24368 of 2006, warranting punishment for contempt.

Subscribe to unlock Issue of Consideration Subscribe Now

Final Decision

The contempt petition is closed as the order was complied with.

Law Points

  • Contempt of court
  • compliance with court order
  • closure of contempt proceedings upon satisfaction of order
Subscribe to unlock Law Points Subscribe Now

Case Details

2026 LawText (MAD) (06) 146

CONT P No. 3839 of 2024

2026-06-05

Senthilkumar Ramamoorthy

2026:MHC:2005

For Petitioner: Mr.N.Kolandaivelu, For Contemnor: Mr.L.Gokulraj, Government Counsel (Tax)

R. Vellaichamy

Thiru. Brajendra Navnit, I.A.S., Thiru. Dinesh Ponraj Oliver, IAS., Tmt. Kavitha Rani, M.A., B.Ed.

Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more) Subscribe Now

Nature of Litigation

Contempt petition alleging willful disobedience of a court order.

Remedy Sought

Petitioner sought to punish the respondents for willfully neglecting and disobeying the order dated 10.04.2019 in W.P.No.24368 of 2006.

Filing Reason

Alleged non-compliance with the order dated 10.04.2019 in W.P.No.24368 of 2006.

Previous Decisions

Order dated 10.04.2019 in W.P.No.24368 of 2006.

Issues

Whether the respondents willfully disobeyed the order dated 10.04.2019 in W.P.No.24368 of 2006.

Submissions/Arguments

Government Counsel handed over documents evidencing compliance with the order.

Ratio Decidendi

A contempt petition is closed when the contemnor demonstrates compliance with the court order, as there is no continuing contempt.

Judgment Excerpts

The learned Government Counsel has handed over documents evidencing that the order was complied with. In view thereof, this Contempt Petition is closed.

Procedural History

The petitioner filed W.P.No.24368 of 2006, which was disposed of by order dated 10.04.2019. Subsequently, the petitioner filed CONT P No. 3839 of 2024 alleging willful disobedience of that order. On 05-06-2026, the court closed the contempt petition upon being shown documents of compliance.

Subscribe to unlock full Legal Analysis Subscribe Now
Related Judgement
High Court Madras High Court Closes Contempt Petition After Compliance with Order in Service Matter. Order dated 10.04.2019 in W.P.No.24368 of 2006 Complied With.
Related Judgement
Supreme Court Supreme Court Allows Appeal in Working Journalists Act Case Excluding Perquisites from Gratuity Calculation. Ex-Employee's Gratuity Claim Not Barred; Car Allowance, Free Telephone and Newspapers Not Wages Under Section 2(rr) of the Working Journalist...